Six Sigma literature: a bibliometric analysis

Six Sigma is a business management strategy used by many industries for quality improvement. The aim of the study is to conduct a bibliometric and relational study on Six Sigma research indexed in two well-known databases: Scopus and the Web of Science. Data collection involved 798 articles published in 392 academic journals between 1990 and 2017. Studies were classified based on research type (methodology used), authorship (type and country of affiliation), research field and keywords (co-occurrence and trend). Results show that literature on Six Sigma is dominated by the field of business and management followed by engineering and medicine. United States is the leading country in this topic in terms of documents, cites and co-authorships. Case studies and conceptual papers are clearly the most used methodologies, although there is a noticeable upward trend in surveys in the business and management area. Based on the articles’ keywords, it appears that Lean Six Sigma, the combination of the two management approaches, has recently become one of the most common terms, outpacing traditional terms such as Total Quality Management or continuous improvement. For the field to advance, further survey studies are needed as conceptually it has been deeply researched.

[1]  Francisco Herrera,et al.  Science mapping software tools: Review, analysis, and cooperative study among tools , 2011, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[2]  Edward D. Arnheiter,et al.  The integration of lean management and Six Sigma , 2005 .

[3]  Linda Hendry,et al.  Six Sigma: literature review and key future research areas , 2006 .

[4]  Peter Ball,et al.  Six Sigma: a literature review , 2010 .

[5]  Young Hoon Kwak,et al.  Benefits, obstacles, and future of six sigma approach , 2006 .

[6]  Gregory V. Frazier,et al.  China‐related POM research: a literature review and suggestions for future research , 2007 .

[7]  Ed C. M. Noyons,et al.  A unified approach to mapping and clustering of bibliometric networks , 2010, J. Informetrics.

[8]  Adèle Paul-Hus,et al.  The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: a comparative analysis , 2015, Scientometrics.

[9]  Ramakrushna Padhy,et al.  Six Sigma project selections: a critical review , 2017 .

[10]  S. D. Pohekar,et al.  Six Sigma methodology: a structured review , 2014 .

[11]  S. R. Devadasan,et al.  The origin, history and definition of Six Sigma: a literature review , 2008 .

[12]  Jiju Antony,et al.  Six sigma for service processes , 2006, Bus. Process. Manag. J..

[13]  Roger G. Schroeder,et al.  Six sigma: A goal-theoretic perspective , 2003 .

[14]  D. Tranfield,et al.  Towards a Methodology for Developing Evidence-Informed Management Knowledge by Means of Systematic Review , 2003 .

[15]  José M. Merigó,et al.  Academic research in innovation: a country analysis , 2016, Scientometrics.

[16]  M. Shanmugaraja,et al.  Literature snapshot on Six Sigma project selection for future research , 2012 .

[17]  Fernando Deschamps,et al.  Assessing the maturity of a research area: bibliometric review and proposed framework , 2016, Scientometrics.

[18]  Theodore T. Allen,et al.  Six Sigma Literature: A Review and Agenda for Future Research , 2006, Qual. Reliab. Eng. Int..

[19]  V. S. Patyal,et al.  Six Sigma in construction industry: a review , 2017 .

[20]  V. Grover,et al.  An assessment of survey research in POM: from constructs to theory , 1998 .

[21]  Su Mi Dahlgaard-Park,et al.  Lean Production, Six Sigma Quality, TQM and Company Culture , 2006 .

[22]  Jiju Antony,et al.  Six Sigma in healthcare: a systematic review of the literature , 2018 .

[23]  K. Tan,et al.  The current state of six sigma application in services , 2007 .

[24]  Maria J Grant,et al.  A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. , 2009, Health information and libraries journal.

[25]  Anjali Awasthi,et al.  Improving software quality using Six Sigma DMAIC-based approach: a case study , 2017, Bus. Process. Manag. J..

[26]  J. E. Hirsch,et al.  An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output , 2005, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA.

[27]  A. Raan.  The use of bibliometric analysis in research performance assessment and monitoring of interdisciplinary scientific developments , 2003 .

[28]  Muhammad Jamaluddin Thaheem,et al.  Six Sigma in construction: a review of critical success factors , 2016 .

[29]  Odysseas Moschidis,et al.  Six Sigma's critical success factors and toolbox , 2013 .

[30]  Fernando González Aleu,et al.  Continuous improvement projects: an authorship bibliometric analysis , 2017 .

[31]  Meryem Uluskan,et al.  A comprehensive insight into the Six Sigma DMAIC toolbox , 2016 .

[32]  Alessandro Brun,et al.  Critical success factors of Six Sigma implementations in Italian companies , 2011 .

[33]  Mahesh S. Raisinghani,et al.  Six Sigma: concepts, tools, and applications , 2005, Ind. Manag. Data Syst..

[34]  D. Moher,et al.  Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. , 2010, International journal of surgery.

[35]  R. Andersson,et al.  Similarities and differences between TQM, six sigma and lean , 2006 .

[36]  Ludo Waltman,et al.  Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping , 2009, Scientometrics.

[37]  Jiju Antony,et al.  Lean Six Sigma: yesterday, today and tomorrow , 2017 .

[38]  Padmanabha Aital,et al.  Six Sigma: an overview and further research directions , 2017 .